Rogers explains 'shaping' policy

[James Knott]

D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> >From the Globe and Mail:
>     "Rogers explains ‘shaping' policy" 
>     Network management has been misinterpreted and misunderstood, said Rogers chief strategist Mike Lee 
>     <http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080610.wgtrogers0610/EmailBNStory/Technology/home> 
>
>  
> This explanation is defective.
>
> Clearly they cannot give every user maximum bandwidth all the time --
> they are oversubscribed, and that is a good thing.
>
> The question is how they should divy up the bandwidth.
>
> The simplest fair answer is to divide it up by customer, not protocol.
>
> One could also allow customers declare QoS requests in a way that would not
> allow "gaming" of the system.
>   

I've wondered about this too. Ethernet switches generally use some form 
of "round robin" to ensure all ports can transmit data. This means that 
if you have a huge pile of data to send, after you send one packet, 
everyone else gets a chance to send a packet, before you can send a 
second packet. Now I realize that contention resolution is handled 
differently in cable modems, but there is such a mechanism to ensure 
fair access. Why does this not help to ensure fair use? Also, Rogers 
charges users who go over their allocated data amount. You'd think that 
might slow down some users. However, I can understand Rogers' concerns 
about the amount of bandwidth some of those peer-peer services consume.


-- 
Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org>
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists